Written by: Fathi Kulaib

It is not the first time that the United Nations has announced the formation of investigation committees into accusations related to the United Nations Relief Agency (UNRWA), and coincidentally, all of them are Israeli accusations. Rather, what distinguishes the decision of the Secretary-General of the United Nations to form an independent international committee at the beginning of this February to investigate Israeli allegations about the participation of a number of UNRWA employees in the October 7 operation is that it coincided with a number of donor countries suspending their financial support to the agency, at a time when UNRWA announced the termination of the contracts of a number of UNRWA employees. of its employees and opened an investigation at the highest levels until the “truth” was proven. Although the direct reason for forming the investigation committee is Israeli allegations regarding the agency and its employees, it is clear that Israel and the United States are seeking revenge against the UNRWA in particular and against the United Nations in general, against the backdrop of their positions regarding the aggression. The Secretary-General had previously strongly criticized Israel for its aggression against the Gaza Strip, and considered that “the Hamas attack did not come out of nowhere,” indicating that the causes of the attack were determined by the occupation and its practices against the Palestinian people. In his effort to stop the aggression, he was forced to use Article 99 of the United Nations Charter, and he went to the Security Council demanding an immediate ceasefire.

As for UNRWA, its reports regarding the aggression’s targeting of its headquarters, schools, health centers, food warehouses, and shelters for displaced persons, and the martyrdom of a number of its employees and students, were one of the documents that South Africa relied on in its lawsuit before the International Court of Justice… in addition to dozens of reports issued by United Nations institutions and Its special rapporteur in the Palestinian territories, all of which condemns Israel and exposes it before the countries of the world, making the United Nations and its institutions a direct target for Israel.

It is no secret that Israel wants to get rid of UNRWA, and it seeks both through accusatory political positions against the agency and fabricating lies that incite donor countries in order to stop funding it. A number of agency officials have previously confirmed this matter publicly and on more than one occasion. In 2019, before the 152nd regular session of the Conference of Arab Foreign Ministers, the Commissioner-General said: “There is an unprecedented campaign against the agency to delegitimize the issue of Palestinian refugees… and that all means and means have been employed in this campaign.”

In 2022, the Commissioner-General asserted before the Agency’s Advisory Committee that attempts to delegitimize UNRWA with the aim of undermining the rights of Palestine refugees are increasing in frequency and aggression. Meanwhile, the former director of UNRWA operations in the Gaza Strip in 2021 considered that “hostile parties are trying to end the agency’s work, by following methods of “spreading misleading materials and news.” In addition to the positions and statements of local and international UNRWA officials confirming the reality of the agency’s political targeting.

Far from delving into analysis about the reasons for these accusations and the fierce campaign being launched against UNRWA, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu summed them up in the same 2017 when he said verbatim: “The time has come to dismantle the relief agency and merge its services into the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, which is affiliated with the international organization.” Claiming that the agency incites against Israel because, through its presence and activities, it contributes to perpetuating the refugee problem, he said. Israeli media have revealed that there is a plan drawn up by the Israeli agencies on how to deal with the relief agency in the future, and the daily statements of Israeli officials indicate the accuracy of the information about the existence of this plan, which is divided into three stages: “The first is to distort the image of UNRWA in the eyes of donors and convince it that there is cooperation between UNRWA and the UNRWA movement.” Hamas,” and this is something we have witnessed in the direct accusations that have not, until this moment, been based on any evidence. The second stage is not allowing UNRWA to provide its services and offering international organizations to provide services instead. There were also Israeli attempts to perpetuate this matter, whether through deliberately bombing UNRWA centers and headquarters, or through Israeli banks freezing UNRWA bank accounts or decisions to stop UNRWA tax exemptions. The third stage is to transfer all the tasks of UNRWA to the body that will govern Gaza after the end of the war, assuming that this body will respond to Israeli demands. This seems far-fetched, for more than one reason, including that all United Nations organizations are not prepared to assume the responsibilities that they undertake. UNRWA, as the Secretary-General of the United Nations stated, “The operational cost of UNRWA is much lower than the cost of operating other UN agencies, and other reasons that make it impossible for this matter to succeed, and that there is no alternative to UNRWA except UNRWA in carrying out the burdens and repercussions of the Israeli aggression.” .

What Israel wants from the United Nations is not an investigation into the neutrality of UNRWA or an investigation into its allegations regarding the participation of some of its employees in the October 7 operation. Rather, what it actually seeks is to isolate the UNRWA employees from the issues of their people and from the national concerns of the Palestinian people, as a prelude to making UNRWA a bridge for liquidation. The right of return, whether by reconsidering the definition of a refugee, in a way that strips millions of refugees of their legal status, or by developing strategies that respond to Israeli demands. The incitement existed before the events of October 7, and UNRWA employees have been under the Israeli eye for years, and a number of them have been referred for investigation in previous times, in all gatherings, on the grounds that they violated the neutrality of United Nations institutions. The intended violation includes everything related to the expression of national feelings, whether that is a tweet on social media sites, participation in a national celebration, the funeral of a martyr, congratulations on the release of a prisoner, or the use of terms that Israel considers inflammatory, such as occupation, martyr, resistance, catastrophe, aggression, displacement, etc. These are terms that together constitute a major part of Palestinian memory.

The question that must be asked, while understanding the reason for the United Nations to form an independent international investigation committee to evaluate the “neutrality” of the UNRWA in the face of the American-Israeli campaign, behind which 17 Western countries coordinated, and with the aim of blocking the way for those who want to achieve political results that harm UNRWA, is: Why were the internal regulations of the United Nations bypassed and an independent investigation committee was formed? In dealing with the repercussions of the accusations directed against UNRWA and its employees, we are faced with three forms of investigation: The first is the internal investigation conducted by UNRWA, which usually relates to internal issues, whether between employees and their local bodies or between them and the presidency. The second is the investigation conducted by the United Nations Office of Internal Oversight Services, which is an investigation related to accusations affecting all United Nations institutions, including UNRWA, as it is part of these institutions. This type of committee is the one that was applied many times after Israeli accusations or from affiliated organizations and institutions. she has. The third is the independent investigation conducted under the supervision of the Secretary-General of the United Nations, as happened recently. According to the statement issued by the Secretary-General of the United Nations, the function of the investigation committee that he formed is not to investigate Israeli accusations specifically, and it is also not to condemn UNRWA or take measures that could benefit Israel. To strengthen its position aimed at putting UNRWA in the dock in preparation for targeting it politically by putting forward projects and ideas that gradually lead to its cancellation, liquidation of its services, and referral to other international bodies and organizations. Rather, the committee’s goal is “to determine whether the agency is doing everything within its power to ensure its impartiality and to respond to accusations of serious violations where appropriate.”

What should regulate the UNRWA’s relationship with its employees is not the allegations made by this or that country, but rather the internal regulations that govern this relationship, and this applies to all United Nations employees, whether they belong to major organizations at the headquarters and in various countries of the world. Or in subsidiary institutions. There are three forms that define and organize the work of United Nations employees, including UNRWA employees, which are: the statute and administrative regulations for United Nations employees, standards of conduct for international civil service employees, and circulars and periodic publications issued by the heads and directors of the relevant bodies and regions. This means that condemning any UNRWA employee should not lead to condemning the institution, just as condemning the behavior of any United Nations employee in general and in any country should not lead to condemning the entire institution.

It is not law and justice to punish six million refugees against the backdrop of the participation of 12 agency employees in the October 7 operation, despite the fact that UNRWA and some countries that suspended their support announced that Israel has not yet provided any evidence to prove the validity of its allegations. Any accusations that may be directed at some employees should not be subject to political exploitation in the manner of Israeli statements and positions that insist on attaching the label of “terrorism” to UNRWA. This is an accusation that dates back to more than three decades of Israeli accusations, which several investigative committees formed by the United Nations and UNRWA confirmed that they do not The validity of any accusation. Perhaps the most important and dangerous thing mentioned in the statement of the Secretary-General of the United Nations regarding the formation of the committee is how to deal with the report that will be issued by the committee, which is initially scheduled at the end of March and then the final conclusions at the end of April. It is expected that it will include recommendations to “improve and strengthen” the existing mechanisms. It is precisely on this topic that the future discussion will revolve, and political pressures will focus on the mechanisms proposed by the Israelis and Americans under the title “Reforms that must take place within UNRWA,” and this is what brings us back to square one in discussing the goal and intent of the reforms.

Reform, in principle, is self-evident and permanently required, regardless of any accusations against UNRWA, and this has been repeatedly confirmed, whether by Palestinian political movements or by the employees themselves, but what must be rejected is the reform that occurs under political pressure and in the service of political goals. It has to do with Israeli and American efforts that have been seeking for years to get rid of the UNRWA, as it is one of the foundations on which the right of return for millions of Palestinian refugees is based, based on UN Resolution No. 302, which, along with Resolution 194, is considered a legal background for the work of the UNRWA and its relationship with the United Nations General Assembly. Rejecting the Israeli claims regarding “neutrality” does not mean in any way bypassing the United Nations staff system, which is appreciated and committed by all staff. Rather, the reservation expressed by staff and the Palestinian people is in the discretionary interpretations of this system that would Expanding its interpretation could lead to a comprehensive siege that prevents employees from even simply belonging to Palestine and from expressing themselves and their identity as refugees struggling for their return to their land, which is called for by United Nations resolutions. If freedom of opinion and expression is a sacred value for the United Nations and all its institutions, then the minimum rights of an employee at the UNRWA is to express his opinion in a healthy and safe environment away from the sword of persecution that leads to the isolation of more than 28,000 employees from their national environment. We agree with Israel and the United States on the necessity of canceling and liquidating UNRWA services, but its political, legal, moral and natural alternative is to implement Paragraph 11 of Resolution No. 194, which explicitly calls for the return of refugees. If the general characteristic of UNRWA is the “temporary formula,” then the end of this formula is directly linked to the end of the reason for which the relief agency was established, which is the return of refugees to their homes and properties from which they were displaced, in 1948, with the force of murder and terrorism committed by the Zionist gangs, and not as Israel and the United States propose. The United Nations, which considers that the solution is to get rid of both, i.e. UNRWA and the refugees, or to get rid of the UNRWA first by striking the right of return. It is no longer a secret to anyone the truth about the pressure exerted by the United States on the Relief Agency to isolate its employees. It has bargained in previous times between the continuation of its financial contribution and UNRWA taking measures to limit the employees’ practice of any political activity. It previously succeeded in forcing UNRWA to sign a “framework agreement” that made it It is captive to American conditions in everything related not only to employees, but also to UNRWA facilities and policies, and to determining the categories of beneficiaries of services. This is in addition to pressure from donor countries on UNRWA to change its strategies in dealing with refugees. We have a clear example of putting pressure on the agency’s budget, as the contributions of many donor countries declined, and at the same time these countries doubled their contributions to other humanitarian organizations. This is what the Palestinian refugees are well aware of, that the main reason for the financial crisis that the UNRWA has been experiencing for decades is not financial, but primarily political, and aims to liquidate the right of return for millions of Palestinian refugees and abolish the UNRWA.

– Member of the Political Bureau of the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine